UMFan83

As I predicted, lack of TOs takes away Michigan's last chance. I hate when coaches manage to use all their TO's in a close game. It just shouldn't happen IMO.

Ugh, only down 1, but only 2.9 seconds left and the key is 0 timeouts left. Even if we can foul them in time, if they miss the 2nd one, there's no way UM gets off a decent shot. Only hope is a steal and quick bucket. How awesome would that be?

Ugh, Michigan had 3-4 possessions down 2 in the last 3 minutes of the game and took a bunch of rushed 3's and missed them all. Michigan just lost their composure down the stretch. At least they kept it competitive and didn't give up when they went down double digits 2 separate times in the game. Gotta beat Wisconsin later in the week to keep their ranking.

Winning at Indiana is hard enough. It's impossible when Indiana shoots almost 60% from the field.

The only Winter Classic I have ever watched is the Hawks/Wings game in Wrigley because I am a big college FB fan. Wings fans are pretty sure they are getting the Winter Classic next year in the Big House or Comerica. My guess they will play either the Hawks or the Leafs if they play in the Big House. They would need a decent road team draw to fill 110,000 seats I would think. I read that the Hawks are out. Detroit is ok, but against its another team in the NE/Great Lakes area. Would love to see them put it in a different region at some point. I'm sure to the casual fan, other than playing at Wrigley or Fenway, its has seemed like the same thing every year.

Ouch let DePaul have their day in the sun before you bag on their opponent :)

Well at least DePaul won because Michigan is currently getting stomped and the Hawks just lost a heartbreaker. 1-2 is better than 0-3.

Sucks....but can't be taking penalties with 2 minutes left in a tie game. I hate playing in this dump, I know we won the Cup here but in the regular season we still haven't won since 1996. And this is the 2nd time in the last 3 years we lost a heartbreaker here.

Nope but they only got 2

And there goes our point. Dammit I wish they didn't come back now. 1-3-0 in our last 4 games

Gotta kill most of a penalty in order to get a point....ugh

Damn, I gave up on this game in favor of college basketball. lets at least steal a point here.

DePaul up 3 on Pittsburgh with 8 minutes left on ESPN2. Based on DePaul games from the last 3 years, we know how this ends. For those that don't realize, they didn't get blown out of every Big East game over that span, they actually had a few very competitive games that they blew at the end. Probably from teams taking them lightly but still. Also, I should be looking forward to Indiana/Michigan but I cannot see Michigan winning in Bloomington. Hope I'm wrong.

Geez, it was 1-1, I run an errand and come back to see the score now 4-2 Flyers. Hawks starting to scuffle. If they lose this one they will be 1-3-0 in their last 4 games, 3 of them at home.

Fortunately, the Bulls just have one stretch of three games in three days and the third game is home vs the Wizards. Still...every starter except Rose had a decent break tonight. Lucas wasn't awful in his time, he needs to be getting more than 8 minutes. The only part of it that worries me is that these were the first 2 games of a 9 games in 12 days stretch which I believe is the worst the schedule can get. It starts with a 4 games in 5 night run, which in a normal season is the worst the schedule can get. Then they get one day off and come back with 5 games in 6 nights including obviously 3 in a row. Rose is young and Deng is too but we are playing a frequency of games that you would never see in a regular schedule. We don't really know how players respond in that environment. Then I remember similar complaints about last year and remember hearing him say afterward how gassed he was against Miami.

i don't even care about the $200m or whatever. with the cubs dumping zambrano's money and having ARam's contract expire, they were never going to be able to spend that (especially with the new draft rules) unless they went out and signed a few high-priced free agents. there shouldn't be a requirement to spend a certain amount of money each year; that's a nice way to end up with dumbass contracts. if they love next year's free agent class or something, pocket the profits from this season and then go crazy next year. i'm not excited that the team is probably going to be lousy in 2012, but there are smart people running the organization and i'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt. Right they don't have to spend the money, but if the money helps them with their goal of acquiring young talent and building a premier farm system, it makes sense to spend it. I'm not suggesting handing out bad long term contracts, I'm suggesting finding a few older veterans who are willing to sign for 1-2 years at a low cost, bring them aboard and if/when we are bad in July, getting value for them. If we do have a $200 million budget, and we are only at like $140 or so (hypothetical number), it seems like going that route is better than not spending the money. I haven't put a lot of thought into this but the types of people I'd be talking about are names like Lyle Overbay, Michael Cudduyer, Luke Scott, Jorge Cantu, Felipe Lopez, Orlando Cabrera, Eric Chavez, etc. No they aren't going to bring the Cubs some top prospect, but if they play well the first few months of the year, they'll probably find a team desperate enough for a 1B (or 3B or whatever) to give us some sort of prospect with upside. If they do, to me that's a better use of resources than not spending the money that has been budgeted for baseball operations.

an actual vision for the future and not taking on more bad contracts. let's be realistic, the cubs' core was lousy and the only way the cubs were going to be any good in 2012 was to make at least a couple of expensive free agent signings or trade the few good prospects we have for good major league players on other teams. If they weren't going to go after high priced long term FAs, to me the next best thing would have been to sign some veterans on 1-2 year deals to fill the holes. It has a duel purpose, it at least somewhat gives the fans the impression that they are not punting this year, and who knows, maybe its the right combo and we catch lightning in a bottle. Not likely but crazier things have happened. The other purpose of doing this, and this is the key, is that if it doesn't work out, which it likely won't, you have the ability to trade away these guys at the trading deadline to get more minor league prospects - the stated goal of the organization. It seems like trading away a decent veteran player at the deadline typically yields a larger return than in the offseason, as teams are trying to fill holes to keep their teams in contention. It doesn't really hurt the Cubs long term strategy this year because there really isn't anyone thats ready to fill most of the positions where we have a hole. Also, we clearly have space in the payroll to afford a couple of guys at 1 year/$8mil or something like that. I dunno, it seemed like a no brainer to me, but I'm not as smart as Theo so maybe his strategy is better. To me it seems like a decent way to use resources to get more talent. As it stands right now, it doesn't seem like we are even close to spending the supposed $200 mil budget that many reported, unless that budget is going to fixing Wrigley Field.

PS this thread has brought out the worst in NSBB. Lots of name calling, mocking other posters with differing opinions, etc. Come on guys...

Thank you. It was a sunk cost and the Cubs already decided that Z wasn't coming back. I forget where I read it but I remember seeing something that suggested that the players pretty much did not want Z to come back. They were mad he "quit" on them and angry that he continues to pull this [expletive] year after year. Not a great environment to start the Theo Epstein era. Now you can say 'tough [expletive] they are professionals they will work it out', but whats the point in a lost season? Z is not a bad pitcher but he is what he is at this point. He's a FA after this year, so making the move now makes sense. I know the counter is, what if Z pitches lights out to start the year, as he is a relatively streaky pitcher at this point. Fine that's a risk but you also risk being completely unable to trade him with poor play and/or another blow up. Bottom line, Z's career with the Cubs was over that night in Florida (or wherever it was) and to get at least 1 young pitcher with upside is a positive IMO.

Since it doesn't seem like many read the fangraphs article posted on page 11, I'll post the Volstad bit. This was in an article talking about the top 5 SIERA Underperformers: I don't mind Volstad being the main player coming back at all. We all wanted Theo in part due to his ability to use statistics to find undervalued players, yet when it comes to acquiring these people we immediately revolt. I say let Theo succeed or fail before we completely judge his moves as horrible.

Heck, I only count 6 Cubs that were on the 08 playoff roster (I don't think Koyie Hill was) Dempster Shark Marmol Soto Soriano Reed Johnson And of those 6, Reed left and came back, and Shark spent significant time in the minors the next 2 seasons after 08, so really only those other 4 have continuously been on Cubs since 08

wow... um... shark? no idea Dempster's been here since the end of 2004, that'd be my guess.

I think people are forgetting how low Z's value is. I don't think teams were buying Theo's words about being willing to keep Z. He had to go. There were whispers that the team would not at all be ok with him coming back into the clubhouse after what he did last year. Even getting $2 million dollars and a young major league player and prospect is great IMO. I'll guess that they could have eaten less but since the payroll is so low opted to eat more to get a better return. I can't remember why but I remember really liking Volstad a year or two ago. Obviously his numbers have been rather poor but I like the potential he brings. I like that there are a couple of wild cards in the rotation between Wood and Volstad. It's better than Zambrano who you know what you are getting, a high 3's/low 4's ERA, frustratingly inconsistent performances and at least one humiliating blowup.

For who though?

He's so much better than Neil Funk. Then again, I think many of us on here could call a game better than Neil Funk can. I actually prefer Funk to Larivee. But Tom Dore needs to come back God no. I hated Tom Dore. In terms of recent announcers for the Bulls, here is my order: Swirsky > King > Wennington > Kerr (RIP) > Funk > Dore > Larrivee The only complaint I have about Swirsky and Wennington is some times they talk way too long during FT attempts and you have to rely on crowd noise to determine if they made them. Sometimes they don't tell you at all and you have to rely on them telling you the score to figure it out.